Dr. David Duong

The applicant sought medical and rehabilitation benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing that chronic pain and psychological impairments warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The adjudicator found that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that his injuries fell outside the MIG.

The medical evidence indicated large gaps in treatment and an intervening fall that caused significant injuries, breaking the causal link to the accident.

Furthermore, the adjudicator preferred the respondent's psychological assessment, which found no accident-related psychological disorder.

As the applicant remained within the MIG, the disputed treatment plans and claim for interest were dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a 2013 motor vehicle accident, claiming she sustained a catastrophic impairment due to chronic pain syndrome and psychological impairments.

The respondent denied further non-earner benefits, massage therapy, and the catastrophic impairment designation.

The Tribunal found the applicant to be an unreliable historian whose evidence was riddled with inconsistencies regarding her pre-accident health and post-accident functioning.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's expert evidence, concluding that the applicant's current physical and psychological impairments were caused by pre-existing conditions and other life stressors, not the accident.

Consequently, the applicant failed to prove she sustained a catastrophic impairment or was entitled to the claimed benefits, special award, or interest.

The application was dismissed.